LL-L "Grammar" 2001.10.26 (03) [E]

Fri Oct 26 17:17:47 UTC 2001

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 26.OCT.2001 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: Candon McLean <candon3 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2001.10.25 (02) [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Grammar
>
> Welcome among the unlurked, Candon!

Good to be unlurked. ;-)

> Sandy's, Andy's and your eloquent posts remind me of
> the verbal present tense
> plural _-t_ suffix in many of the North Saxon
> dialects of Low Saxon (Low
> German).  It coincides with that of the 3rd person
> singular.  I believe plural
> _-en_ (surviving in other dialects) is older than
> this plural _-t_.
>
> Ik lehr (I learn)
> du lehrst (thou learnest)
> he lehrt (he learns)
> se lehrt (she learns)
> it ~ dat lehrt (it learns)
> wi lehrt (~ lehren) (we learn)
> ji lehrt (~ lehren) (you learn)
> se lehrt (~ lehren) (they learn)
>
> I wonder if this falls into the same category with
> the stuff you guys (nice
> plural pronoun!) have been talking about.

I don't think this is analogic leveling, rather this
seems to be the influence of High German.

The Proto-Germanic 3rd singular verbal affix was
something like /-iþ/ and the plural affix was /-anþ/
(that's -ith and -anth, if the thorn doesn't show up
for you).

In the Lowland languages (Anglo-Saxon, Saxon, Frisian,
etc.) /n/ is deleted before the voiceless fricatives
/s, f, þ/, which leaves us with the paradigm in
Anglo-Saxon:

he sing_eþ_
we, ge, hie sing_aþ_

The difference in the vowel crucial.

In High German /þ/ became /t,d/ and in the 3rd plural
deleted or assimilated with the /n/.

Er singt
Wir singen[d] > wir singen.

Now, whether the Low Saxon change of /þ/ > /t/ is
independent or influenced by High German, we'd have to
look at more data.

Candon McLean

----------

From: Candon McLean <candon3 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2001.10.25 (02) [E]

> From: "Ian James Parsley" <parsleyij at yahoo.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2001.10.25 (02) [E]

> Candon,
>
> Indeed, welcome to the 'unlurked'!

Thank you!

> RE: Verbal Concord.
>
> Yes, a lot of people have mentioned the Celtic link
> (it is indeed true of both Gaelics to my knowledge),
> but few have mentioned the Scandinavian link which I
> think may be the decisive one in this case.

You could be right.  Still, accounting for why the
concord isn't total (i.e. when the pronoun is adjacent
to the verb) is going to be an interesting problem.

Candon McLean

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Grammar

Candon McLean wrote:

> I don't think this is analogic leveling, rather this
> seems to be the influence of High German.

A point well made.

> In the Lowland languages (Anglo-Saxon, Saxon, Frisian,
> etc.) /n/ is deleted before the voiceless fricatives
> /s, f, þ/, ...

This also applies to Low Saxon (Low German) and Dutch, but not in the purest
form.  In other words, these varieties appear to be semi-Ingveonic.  Thus, in
Low Saxon you get competing forms, e.g., _us_ ~ _uns_ 'us', while the /n/ is
always absent in some words, e.g., /fiiv/ _fiev_ ~ _fief_ (not *_fienf_)
'five' (cf., German _fünf_).

> Now, whether the Low Saxon change of /þ/ > /t/ is
> independent or influenced by High German, we'd have to
> look at more data.

Both /þ/ (written as _th_ in Old Saxon) and /ð/ (written as a barred _d_ in
Old Saxon) developed into /d/; e.g., _thu_ > _du_ 'thou', _uuiðar_ > _wieder_
'further', 'forth'.

As in Dutch and German, final devoicing applies, so that /-d/ comes to be
realized as [t] and in modern dialects tends to be written thus
("phonetically") in orthographies developed by people ignorant of basic
phonological principles; e.g., /roud/ _root_ (~ _rood_) 'red', hence _Sien
Nees' is root_ 'His nose is red' but _He hett 'n rode (not *_rote_) Nees'_ 'He
has a red nose'.

In short, the said process could be language internal, not necessarily
influenced by "High" German.

Another complicating matter is (mostly non-final) /d/ assimilation to
preceding /n/, /N/ and /l/ in most, if not all, Low Saxon varieties.  Thus,
for instance, you get (/dei ziNen(d)en kind-r/ ->) _de singenen Kinner_ [dEI
'zI.N: 'k`I.n3] 'the singing children' vs _dat singene Kind_ [dat 'zI.N(e)ne
k`I.nt] 'the singing child', and _kole Hannen_ [k`oUle 'ha.n:] 'cold hands' vs
_de Hand is kold_ [dEI ha.nt ?Is ko.lt] 'the hand is cold'.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 * Please submit postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================